Click for:
• A complete list of Montana's sedition prisoners.
• Selected profiles
• Prison intake forms (last name A-M or M-W), from the Montana Historical Society Research Center.
Who were these people?
Most
of the 79 persons convicted of sedition under Montana law
worked at menial, blue-collar or rural jobs. Half were farmers,
ranchers
or
laborers. Others worked as butchers, carpenters, cooks, teamsters,
bartenders and saloon swampers. More
than half of the men sent to prison were born in Europe,
many in Germany or Austria. Only three trials involved the
printed word—those of Butte Daily Bulletin editor Will
Dunn and publisher Bruce Smith, and one involving charges
in Beaverhead County against
a pamphleteer for the Industrial Workers of the World, a
radical labor organization.
Probably the most dangerous place to open one’s mouth was Custer County
in southeast Montana.
A total of 13 persons were tried for sedition in Miles City, the county seat;
ten were convicted. Neighboring Rosebud County was four for four. In Helena,
seat of Lewis and Clark County (and the state capital), 11 men were tried for
sedition and 10 were convicted.
The average age of those sent to prison for sedition was 45. The oldest was 74
and the youngest was 29. Collectively, the prisoners ended up serving more than
65 years in prison, an average of 19 months apiece. Nineteen men received fines
of up to $20,000, about $275,000 in 2006 dollars.Eleven
convictions were appealed; seven were reversed by the state
supreme court, but not on free speech grounds. No one in Montana
was convicted under a similar federal sedition
law
based on
the state's law, although more than 30 persons were arrested.In
all, close
to 200 persons in Montana were arrested during the World War
I period on state or federal sedition or related charges, such
as criminal syndicalism and flag desecration. There is probably
no way to count the numbers of Montanans questioned, harassed
or scrutinized by local defense committees probing for "disloyal"
thought in the community, but they doubtless numbered in the
hundreds.
What
they (allegedly)said
Virtually all sedition convictions in Montana were based on witness accounts
of casual statements, often in saloons, that were perceived as pro-German
or anti-American. Strong or vulgar language figured in many cases
and may well have contributed to convictions and sentences.
Statements
that questioned the chastity of women or the morality of the
nation’s soldiers were similarly shocking in World War
I Montana. A Rosebud County farmer got 8 to 16 years for making
the curious remark that, “These free taxi rides given to
the soldiers at Miles City were just for the purpose of getting
them into private houses, so that they may have intercourse with
women (meaning the wives, sisters and daughters of the citizens
of Miles City) and get war babies.”
Those who criticized
or cast doubt on the soundness of Liberty bonds and other means
of supporting the war effort such as savings stamps and food
rationing risked prison terms. A wine and brandy salesman visiting
Red Lodge received a 7 1/2 to 20-year sentence for saying that
the wartime food regulations were a “joke.” Even
a statement such as “we have no business being there,” repeated
countless times in a nation only reluctantly drawn into a war
on another continent, led to a number of convictions.
What
is sedition?
Sedition
is the illegal promotion of resistance against the government,
usually in
speech or writing. What is illegal depends
on the
government and its regard for freedom of speech. The crime of
sedition is alive and actively prosecuted in many countries today.
In the United States, sedition as a crime has been enforced at
several points in its history, notably during the presidency
of John Adams under the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, during
and after World War I, and under a 1940 federal law, the Smith
Act, criminalizing membership in the Communist Party. When the
U.S. Supreme Court first addressed the question of the constitutionality
of sedition laws after World War I, the majority used what was
then the traditional standard for judging “seditious” speech—whether
it had a tendency, even a remote tendency—to stir people
to resistance or rebellion against the government. Later, however,
justices Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. and Louis Brandeis began to
develop a more expansive notion that would give more breathing
room to political dissent. One of the most stirring writings
in American law in defense of free speech is
the opinion by Justice Brandeis in Whitney v. California in 1927.
Holmes’ and
Brandeis’ theory did not prevail in their lifetimes. In
1964, in New York Times v. Sullivan, a majority of the the U.S.
Supreme Court agreed that punishment for sedition was contrary
to the First Amendment, And in 1969, in the case of Brandenburg
v. Ohio, the high court set forth the current standard for punishing
seditious speech. A person cannot be criminally punished for
urging the use of force or for urging that laws be broken “except
where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent
lawless action and is likely to incite...such actions." In
other words, mere words, unless intended to immediately provoke
lawless action, and likely to do so, cannot be punished
by the
state. Had
such a standard been in effect in 1918, no sedition law would
have been enacted.
What was the Montana sedition law?
The law, enacted in a special session of the state legislature
in February 1918, criminalized just about anything negative said
or written about the government
or its conduct of the war. Stiff criminal penalties—a maximum of 10 to
20 years in prison and a $20,000 fine—conveyed the seriousness of the
crime. The pertinent language read:
"Whenever the United States shall be engaged in war, any person or persons
who
shall utter, print, write or publish any disloyal, profane, violent, scurrilous,
contemptuous, slurring or abusive language about the form of government of the
United States, or the constitution of the United States, or the soldiers or sailors
of the United States, or the flag of the United States, or the uniform of the
army or navy of the United States…or shall utter, print, write or publish
any language calculated to incite or inflame resistance to any duly constituted
Federal or State authority in connection with the prosecution of the War…shall
be guilty of sedition."
Was Montana's
law unique?
Other states
also enacted sedition laws in the same period. In 1917, just
after the United States entered the war against Germany, Congress
passed the Espionage Act. This law, despite its name, was enforced
as a sedition law, punishing hundreds of people for voicing
their opinions about the government and the war. In 1918, Congress
passed a more specific sedition law, which was almost a word-for-word
copy of the Montana law.
What
conditions led to Montana's sedition law?
The political and economic establishment, led by the Anaconda Copper
Mining Company, saw a mounting threat by political dissidents,
such as the Industrial Workers of the World, and sought laws to
destroy them. The IWW had been active in promoting strikes against
leading industries, such as copper mining, logging and agriculture
to increase wages being eaten away by inflation and to improve
execrable working conditions. At the same time, wartime frenzy
overtook the state. Even in a state as remote as Montana, most
people believed American democracy to be threatened by German threats
of world domination. Fear and hatred overcame common sense. Extreme
laws were passed. German residents, in particular, bore the brunt
of such passions. German books were banned and burned. Even preaching
in German from the pulpit was banned, a law that was cruelly enforced
even after the armistice was declared.
Could we ever see such laws again?
Yes—if we cave in to fear and hysteria. The terrorist murders
of nearly 3,000 persons in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania
on Sept. 11, 2001, provoked fear, hatred, anxiety and another
round of laws designed to enhance our security. Unfortunately,
some of
those laws, such as certain provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act,
have been enacted at the expense of our civil liberties. We do
have a much more robust history of First Amendment protection
to fall back on than did Americans just after World War I. We have
many fine court opinions in both federal and state courts upholding
our constitutional rights of free speech, laws that back up some
of those decisions, and we have decision-makers and government
leaders who,
for the most part, have a healthy respect for our Bill of Rights.
However, more violent, terrorist acts against Americans, especially
if they occur on American soil, will put more pressure on our
civil liberties and give fear and hysteria a bigger grip on our
national
psyche. Politicians often do what is expedient. Citizens often
accede to unwise laws, and it is not until much later, after
many innocent persons have been punished, that there is a reaction
that
the pendulum has swung too far. The story of Montana’s
sedition prisoners is a cautionary tale about the terrible injustices
that
happened within the memory of our oldest living generation—and
about what we might yet endure.
How can I still help?
The 79 persons convicted of sedition in Montana
in 1918 and 1919 were neither rich nor famous. Most occupied
the
more basic
levels of society. Some were transient. Their traces have faded.
Who were these people? What were their lives like before they
were caught in the sedition net? What happened to them afterwards?
If
you’re in a position to do some research on one or more
of these people, we’d love to have your help.
|